Stanford and the Rose Bowl: Five not-so-simple steps to Pasadena

Because the Hotline is a place for news, analysis … and fun hypotheticals. (Note to Cal fans: I’d do the same thing if the Bears were in a similar situation, and have.)

Now, let’s remember two things before we get deep into this:

* Anything can happen in the next month. ANY-THING. This entire post could very well be moot by Saturday night.

* There is also a chance that Stanford could land in the Orange, Sugar or Fiesta bowls, although that possibility is more remote — partly because the Fiesta picks last (Hello, Big East champ!) — and it involves another layer of permutations that are best left for another week.

OK …

I’m guessing that we can all agree there’s much better chance of Oregon running the table than of Oregon losing twice (the Arizona game’s in Eugene … Kevin Riley’s hurt … the Beavers are baffled by the spread). And if Oregon runs the table, then Stanford would have to take the at-large route to Pasadena.

Getting there won’t be easy. In fact, it’s going to be very, very difficult.

One last thing before we get to the steps, for those unfamiliar with the complicated Rose Bowl selection process:

If the Rose loses one of its anchor teams (Big Ten or Pac-10 champion) to the National Championship Game this season, then it’s obligated to take the highest-ranked team from a non-Automatic Qualifier conference — we’re talking Boise State or the TCU-Utah winner — if that non-AQ school doesn’t reach the title game.

If the highest-ranked non-AQ team does play for the title, then the Rose Bowl is relieved of its obligation but would still have the option to take a non-AQ school.

(In other words, if the TCU-Utah winner plays Oregon for the national title and Boise State’s sitting there at 12-0, the Rose could take BSU.)

Hopefully, no Hotline reader heads have exploded yet.

Now, to the five not-so-simple steps …

1) Stanford must run the table, which isn’t a stretch given that its two toughest games (Arizona and Oregon State) are at home.

2) Oregon must run the table, which is quite likely.

3) LSU must beat Alabama on Saturday (see Note 1 below).

4) Alabama must beat Auburn on Nov. 26 (again: Note 1 below).

5) Utah must lose (see Note 2 below).

If that set of events unfold, then I’d give Stanford a 99 percent chance of playing in the Rose Bowl, with the 1% being a nod to BCS craziness. (See: Cal, 2004.)

Now the notes:

*** Note 1: Stanford fans should look at it from this perspective:

If Oregon occupies one of the national championship slots, then which teams could prevent an undefeated Boise State or Utah/TCU from snaring the other — thus forcing the non-AQ team into the Rose Bowl (and blocking Stanford’s path)?

The answers:

* Undefeated Auburn would jump into the title game, for sure. And the Tigers’ toughest remaining game, by far, is the Iron Bowl vs. Alabama.

* One-loss Alabama — the Tide must run the table — would probably jump into the NCG because 1) it’s the defending national champion and 2) it plays in the conference that has produced the last four national champions.

(I’m much less certain that one-loss LSU or one-loss Auburn would edge out the undefeated non-AQ team, but it’s possible.)

*** Note 2: As I stated at the top, the Rose Bowl would be relieved of its obligation to take a non-AQ if one of them jumps into the title game …. but it still could go that route. (If it declines, it would be right back in the same situation next year.)

Let’s say the Utah-TCU winner moves into the title game and Boise State’s sitting there are 12-0 with Stanford at 11-1. My guess is the Rose would take Stanford because of the Pac-10 relationship.

But what if the situation reverses and Boise State jumps into the title game and Utah’s sitting there at 12-0. The Rose might feel compelled to take the Utes, who would have a better record, be higher ranked … and be an incoming member of the conference.

Then taking 11-1 Stanford over the non-AQ isn’t such a no-brainer.

Stanford would be best served by that discussion never taking place, and it never takes place if Utah loses to TCU this weekend.

So, to recap for Stanford fans, here’s what you want this weekend:

Stanford over Arizona
TCU over Utah
LSU over Alabama

Jon Wilner

Post navigation

@ Telrod – I can see how a fan with blue and yellow glasses looking for Stanford hubris could fail to read the subtlety of TK’s post. There are clearly implied “IF’s” throughout and as he ends the post to a reference to potentially losing in Strawberry Canyon, I think an objective observer would have a hard time saying he’s exuding excessive confidence in the 11-1 potential.

But I’ll leave it to him to confirm whether my read is correct.

I’m sure if you dig hard enough, you’ll find a quote from John O at the beginning of the season predicting 12-0 and another quote or two from a Stanford fan who is confident on the season’s course, but by and large, I think a fair read of the tone here is cautious optimism.

But clearly this argument is a waste of time as Cal fans will only see what they choose to see.

FarmSkeptic

And there you have it. As I posted, TK confirmed.

lesliemedford

FarmSkeptic’s reading comprehension, or intelligence, is suspect if she/he is unconvinced of my gender at this point. I’ve been posting on this blog for 2.5 years now. Seemingly every other regular poster has gleaned the reality.

I was the first for Toby Gerhart here. And, now dubbed knight by Telrod’s silver blade a-tapping, I guess I am first to see the 11-1 about to unfold.

I’ll take my lashings if it doesn’t happen, and accept your congratulations when it does. Particularly yours, Ms.Believer(as you will be then) and Telrod.

NorCal Tree

First off – we just need to keep winning, week in and week out! This is going to be a great game and tickets are selling nicely.

As for the Rose Bowl taking Utah over Stanford. I think that’s unlikely. How many Stanford Alums on the Rose Bowl Executive Board?!

If we keep improving upon last week’s efforts – I like our chances.

As for the weenies on this thread….the Giants have now climbed the mountain and it’s a great thing for the Bay Area! You poor ol’ bears, maybe someday, but I’m not putting money on it. Roll on home…

FarmSkeptic

I apologize leslie, I don’t mean it as a slight, but I honestly feel I’ve gotten mixed signals about whether you’re a man or woman. i seem to recall a post about you being the prettiest gal is a cowboy hat or something like that. but other posts lead me to think you’re a man. leslie is, unfortunately, an ambiguous gender name. my apologies if i offended.

but i’ll admit that my reading comprehension ain’t what it should be all the time.

dc4azcats

@ Farm Skeptic – Lets look at who you played:

Notre Dame – 80th ranked total defense and you scored 5 FG’s in this game and gave up 307 passing yards to a not so good Notre Dame team.

USC – 98th ranked total defense and Barkley throws for 390 yards.

Wazzu – I know this game was a “fluke” but I think it’s worth mentioning that Tuell threw for 298. Wazzu ranks last in total D as an FYI.

So my question to you would be where do you put Arizona’s passing game in relation to to the three teams mentioned above?

As far as the NCAA is concerned – Arizona is the best passing team you will have faced thus far at #12 in the country. Notre Dame checks in at #17, SC at #21, and Wazzu at #34. Those 3 teams combined to throw for just under 1000 yards in a 3 game stretch.

The best D that Stanford has faced TY is Oregon at #35. After Oregon you have to go down Notre Dame at #80 as the next toughest defensive team you’ve faced thus far.

Arizona on the other hand has faced Iowa at #12 and Cal at #21.

So again – who has a better chance of stopping who? I’ll take Arizona’s D getting more stops vs Stanford than Stanford’s D getting stops vs Arizona’s passing game. That’s what this game will come down to – is who can get stops.

GBBS

@leftcoast –

Stanford may make have filled the rose bowl in 1999, but they sure have a hard time filling the seats in their own stadium. That does not bode well in the money hungry minds of the BCS. BTW who has the Axe?

Scott

If the roles were reversed and Cal was 7-1 with a potential for 11-1 and a Rose Bowl bid, I’m sure we’d be hearing the same kind of posts. If anything you hear alot of tempered optimism from Card fans considering their recent run of down years and the loss in Big Game.

Honestly, I don’t care a whole lot if the posts here of a smattering of fans are Hubris filled or not. I only care about the attitudes of the players and how they perform on the field. To date, it’s been awesome and alot of fun.

War Eagle!!

This really is mute as Auburn will roll through the rest of its schedule and its unlikely that Boise or the Utah, TCU winner will lose the remainder of any of their games. Sorry stanford but it looks like once again the Pac-10 will be on the outside looking in. The good news is you get to now travel to San Antonio for the new bowl game the pac-10 inherited as its new #2 game…oh wait that isn’t good news…sorry

War Eagle!!

BTW Jon I wanted to let you know based on your recent posts on this and the WAC discussion that Prop 19 did not pass. Just thought you should know as it seems from these articles you must be breaking that law

lesliemedford

FarmSceptic,
Accepted and no prob. I’m well used to it as you can imagine.

Here’s a little edu for everyone:

Scottish clan name, the 12th most popular boy’s name in Britain during the 1920’s or something like that according to census records. Not many left, but we’re still all around. Even in pro sports I can think of L. Frazier (vikings coach) L.Lancaster (cubs pitcher) L.Shepherd(wide receiver) as being recent wearers. President Ford’s given name was Leslie (why choose Gerald?!) as was Bob Hope’s. Also, Leslie Moonves is prez and ceo of CBS. Fun facts: There were two other unrelated male Leslie’s in my small Virginian rural high school, one of whom was also in my Scout Troop. There have been male leslies in my family for generations, including my father and grandfather, both colonels (marine and army, respectively.)

And like Elvis’s surname, in the South where I’m from, (as in the British Isles where my family is from) we pronounce it Lezlee.

Forgive me…now back to sports.

TK94111

GBBS,

I defy you to have sat through Stanford’s home games during Buddy Ball and Walt Harris years. I was there, believe me, I would not bring my out-of-town guests to those games.

It was bad product, especially for those who have loose or no affiliation other than proximity.

You have the axe.

Scott

@dc4azcats

You can say look at who Stanford has played and quote #’s but we’d probably respond, look who you haven’t played.

It’s a little bit hard to judge the AZ defense when you’ve only played the #6, #7, #8, #9, #10 scoring offenses in the Pac-10. We’ve already played the #1 and #3 with ourselves the #2. I’m more excited to watch the game Sat. than trying to compare how what team has stopped who so far.

Harold

Bowl games that require schools to purchase a minimum number of tickets — which is most of them, these days — don’t pay a lot of attention to home attendence. Why should they? If Stanford has to buy, say, 10,000 tickets, it’s Stanford’s problem to sell them, not the bowl games.

What matters to the bowl committees is TV ratings. As much TV buzz as Andrew Luck generates — you practically cannot watch a college football show without somebody calling him the best quarterback in the game — that won’t be a problem.

And while the Rose Bowl is of course the very best place to be playing a post-season game, I’ve been to San Antonio twice for Final Fours and would be absolutely delighted to go back for a bowl game. Anybody who thinks otherwise has never been there.

FarmSkeptic

@Harold – I imagine the bowl will also take into account how many hotel rooms and what kind of boost to local economy (restaurants, tourist attractions, etc.) will be gathered by different opponents. My understanding is these committees are run by local business types with ties to the community and showing benefit to the broader community is also important, though perhaps secondary to TV ratings. So all things being equal, I can see a bowl have a preference for a team that will bring a lot of fans from out of town to stay in hotels and spend money on the street.

FarmSkeptic

@dc4azcats – those are all great points, but they’d be more relevant if I was arguing over whose team has better defensive or passing offensive stats. Overall stats can be very misleading, even at the 8 game mark, because of lack of comparable competition. I would argue it’s more interesting to look at performance head to head and you did nothing to rebut the facts that Stanford scored more than Arizona and held opponents to fewer points for the three teams that we’ve played in common.

As for ND, go back and look at the game, you’ll see that Stanford held ND to 2FG’s through three quarters and their passing game was shut down until the 4th quarter when 2nd and 3rd stringers were put in the game. ND picked up 72 passing yards on their last drive (which did not result in a score) and 79 on the previous 4th quarter drive that resulted in the TD. Clearly Stanford BACKUP defense is not very strong. Hopefully you’ll have a lot of opportunities to rack up points on them on Saturday…

As for USC, Barkeley is a great QB and he has some great WR’s. You talk about Cal’s stout defense? USC through on them for 390 yrds and 5TDs, most of that in one half. Good luck to you on holding them back (that’s not sarcastic, I do hope you pound them and stop their D.) They clearly shredded us, as they’ve been doing consistently. From what I’ve seen, they have the best passing offense in the Pac10. I’m sure your stats say otherwise, but I’ll wait and see how it plays out.

I’ve no doubt we’ll have our hands full, and I’m sure you’ll be able to find some other stats that demonstrate UA superiority, I’m just curious how you explain away the stats in the only head to head comparison we have available (ie, WSU, UW, and UCLA)

I hope you’re there Saturday. It should be a beautiful day and it’s always fun to have a healthy contingent of opponents’ fans. Now, I actually do need to get some work done myself.

Cheers.

CardFromSEC

Props to John O for catching what Wilner missed:
The SEC title game.

Pretty big oversight, considering this year’s South Carolina team has already shown its ability to knock off a number one. (btw, if bama gets a rematch, they’re not losing.)

A late loss to a two-loss SC can knock anyone out of title contention, especially if its loss number two.

elvismedford

FS – I think Stan has his numbers mixed up. I’m predicting the Card wins in Strawberry Canyon by a score of 199 to -3, not 99-3. But don’t mistake this for hubris!

Cheers.

elPalo

@Harold: May I add that Stanford fans will probably spend more than any other PAC-10, WAC team. And I agree, as far as a pleasant place to visit for a few days, I would rather be in San Antonio than in downtown LA.

Alas, but we dream on. There is still a lot of ball left to be played.

FarmSkeptic

elvis – excellent point. Oregon fans are talking about the need to add another digit to the visitor scoreboard at Pac10 stadiums going forward. We should ask the teams to all install another operand as well. Then we can create a Tedford-the-QB-Guru rule in which any time an “elite” QB recruited by Tedford tosses a pick six, it counts as negative points to Cal, instead of positive points for the opposition. you’re a man ahead of your time, Elvis. Now pass me the platter of Monte Cristo sandwiches.

dc4azcats

The reason I compared what I did is because your comparisons are flawed in the sense that against WSU and UCLA we used our back-up QB. So you’re comparing apples and oranges.

Scott played most of the game vs Wazzu but it was clearly under a game plan that was meant for Foles. They blitzed Scott all game long and he struggled at times with that. Would Foles have struggled? Well they weren’t blitzing Foles when he was playing so it obviously wasn’t a strategy that they had planned on using.

Ucla was a similar situation as Scott started and played the whole game not Foles. Scott did play well but he had 2 critical turnovers in the red zone that I would argue that Foles doesn’t make the same mistakes. One was a fumble by Scott on the ucla 10 yardline. The other was Scott throwing a pick in the endzone on a fade route that wasn’t there and the ball never should’ve been thrown. Foles reads that and doesn’t make the throw.

UW – was also a different game from the standpoint that the game was at Arizona and the team and the crowd was into this game from the get go. Arizona was looking for some revenge based on LY’s game where we got jobbed by the review officials. UW was never in this game and never had a chance in this game.

So if you want to compare – answer my original question? If Arizona has the same QB and the same WR’s as LY vs a Stanford team that has a comparable secondary as LY – who’s going to win that battle?

As for our defense and comparisons go – look at the top 5 RB’s in the conference and you will see that Arizona has faced 4 of the top 5. Only one of those RB’s rushed for over 100 yards (Vereen with 103) and none of the 4 exceeded their average.

Arizona gives up 88 yards rushing a game. Stanford needs to rush the ball effectively to create play action and that will be a big key to this game. If you can’t rush the ball then it doesn’t mean that you stop Luck it just means that you give yourself a chance to make some stops.

Which goes back to what I have said from the get go – can Arizona get enough stops to win this game and i think they can. I think it will be a lot harder for Stanford to get stops when they can’t stop Arizona’s passing game. Stanford – like LY will have to dedvote so much to stopping Arizona on the outside that at some point the middle will be wide open fro a quick hitter like we did twice LY with Nwoko and Grigsby.

Mk92

@dc4az –

Although much of the personnel is the same for stanford as last year, there are 3 major differences:

First and foremost, Vic Fangio. If you think this year’s D is the same as last year’s because of the personnel, you really haven’t been paying attention. Fangio completely changed the schemes and the attitudes in a way that’s made a huge difference.

Second, Michael Thomas.

Third, home field. Stanford doesn’t have much of a home field advantage in terms of crowd noise, but the very fact that they don’t have to deal with travel, tucson, etc is an important factor.

FarmSkeptic

@dc4az – you make a lot of great points, many of which mk92 addressed. I am of the same mind as he, that the assumption that TY’s Stanford D is the same as LY’s Stanford D is off base.

Sure, we lost Bo McNally and a few other solid players from last year, but mostly the players from last year have returned, matured, and been placed into a new defensive system that seems to have improved the team. they’re not to be mistaken for Iron Curtain, but they’re significantly improved over 2009, especially the linebacker core with Chase Thomas and Shane Skov.

I’m sure you’ll counter that your guys have improved as well and we’ll go back in circles. My point would be that using last year’s AZ game as a baseline would be a mistake, at least for Stanford defense and offense.

It sounds like you’ve got a lot of great reasons why Arizona’s play against those teams should be discounted. I can play the same game:
– Chris Owusu, our #1 big play threat, was out for WSU and UCLA. He is back and returning to speed.
– Tyler Gaffney, our #2 back (thunder to Taylor’s lightning) was out for WSU (as well as Oregon and USC) but made a nice return last week and should be back to full speed
– Delano Howell, a key ingredient to both our pass defense, was out for WSU and USC, but made a nice return for UW

I’m unclear on your point about UW above. You’re highlighting that @ home, with extra motivation from last year, UA did worse than Stanford did playing @UW, who had motivation for having lost to us last year…[scratching head]

Of course, we can make excuses for why results weren’t better, or we can own up…

But the most convincing argument YOU make for why to choose Stanford over Arizona is the QB situation for UA. If Scott is prone to errors (as you imply) and Foles is an uncertain commodity in returning from an injury, why would one prefer that QB combination to Luck vs. UA’s D?

As for your point about the defensive performance against the league’s top rushers, I’m not sure who the 4 are to which you refer, but you have yet to play James and Taylor, the #1 and #5 in total yards. But I’ll flip your argument back on you. The other RBs you’ve stopped don’t have the passing game that Stanford has. Slowing Cal’s running game ain’t so hard when you’ve got Riley throwing the ball outside the confines of Memorial (or Stanford) Stadium. Katz is good, but he’s no Andrew Luck. And we’ll just chuckle at the idea of a UCLA passing game. With Luck under center, hopefully Stanford can keep the UA defense a bit more honest than they probably were against those three.

Of course, your vision of the game is certainly plausible. UA has some great DE and if they can disrupt our line, it will make for a tough day. But I like our chances.

I look forward to your next round of reasoning.

dc4azcats

First off – love the banter and hopefully the game lives up to the hype. Forget Notre Dame putting up 300 or Wazzu putting up 298 in passing yards and lets just use SC and Barkley.

He lit up Stanford for close to 390 yards – this year!!! He only completed 28 passes – Barkley has a completion rate of 63%. Foles is a 75% passer and he is not only 100% but he is well rested and ready to go.

I don’t care who your DC is – those aren’t impressive numbers. What happens when you compare SC’s Wr’s to Arizona’s Wr’s? I would call it close but give the edge to Arizona because of Criner. Then you compare Barkley and Foles and one is ranked #21 in Foles and Barkley is #24 in passing efficiency nationally. (Luck is ranked 10th) In passing Foles is ranked 9th nationally and Barkley is 29th (Luck is 34th).

And yet – your secondary is better and I’m trying to figue out where? You got torched for 390 yards by a good QB in Barkley with good WR’s and you’ll do more than hold your own against a better ranked QB in Foles and arguably better WR’s in Arizona? Really? Don’t see it and it continues to be the biggest mismatch in this game and will be the reason Arizona wins this game if in fact Arizona does win this game.

All Arizona has heard all week from the media is how Stanford is favored by 9 and will soon be 11-1. Not a lot of respect for an Arizona team that thinks it has a pretty good team too.

Last add – it will be interesting to see if Arizona can get out to a lead early in this game. When Arizona gets a lead in a game they’re 7-0 as they don’t relenquish the lead once they get it. The only loss was to the Beavs and we never led in the game.

Daasax

Remember, Foles DID NOT play in the last 3 games (ok a little in WSU). So to compare statistical indicators of the past with a different person running the offense is ridiculous.

Let the teams play and then make your comparisons, until then just know the pac-10 hasn’t played very good competition and I predict Oregon to be figured out by a good defense (see ASU – they just needed an offense that didn’t turn the ball over 7 times).

I am just happy to see a football game against to great teams (that used to not be so great).

Calfan

Leslie is not a gal? Wonder of wonders…

StanTheMan

50% of my “hubris” is speculation (i.e., ***IF*** they go 11-1), and the other 50% is designed to get a rise out of Weenie fans.

The way I see it, Stanford fans’ “hubris” is the Weenie fan’s way of saying he/she’s jealous of our success this year while the Weenies’ season is sitting up on top of an oak tree with your tree sitters piles of crap.

@dc – I don’t see Stanford being fazed in the least by a 7-0 deficit. Before the UW game Stanford was the best team in the country in the first quarter, outscoring opponents by something like 160-30. I think your D gives us some trouble but they haven’t seen this kind of balanced attack. On the flipside, Foles/Scott are going to have to have a great night passing. I don’t see your running game being very effective.

dc4azcats

At StanTheMan – I didn’t say Stanford would be fazed by a 7 point deficit. I was merely pointing out that Arizona is 7-0 TY when it has the lead in a game. Against Cal that came in the last 2 minutes.

On the flip side – I thought I read somewhere that Stanford gives up a ton of points in the 4th qtr?

As for our D not seeing a balanced attack? They see it every day in practice.

As for the Arizona running game – the last 2 weeks Arizona has been very effective rushing the ball. Is that because of Matt Scott or teams with crappy run D?

I think Scott is a definite wild card for this game. Again – Thomas went for 117 yards running the zone read on 14 carries vs Stanford. Scott does the same zone read and is very effective in getting to the outside.

Stanford has to prepare for both QB’s and for as big of a game as this is – wouldn’t surprise me in the least if Arizona put in some packages for Scott. Rumor has it that they include both Scott and Foles in the backfield at the same time.

Last year – Arizona rushed the ball all of 14 times vs Stanford and averaged close to 10 yards a carry.

I would also point out that because of Arizona’s success throwing the ball – they don’t need to establish a run game as the quick hits to Criner and company are good for 4 to 7 yards a pop. Stanford isn’t going to go into press coverage so the quick hits will be there all game long.

FarmSkeptic

dc – you’ve made a lot of good points, but you keep regressing to notions that should have already been dispelled.

first things first, when you’re 7-1, being 7-0 in games in which you have a lead is not an insightful statistic. all it means is that in the one game you lost, you never had a lead.

as pointed out in many previous posts, stanford’s D in the 4th quarter has been scored on because it’s blown out so many opponents and we’ve subbed in a lot of 2nd and 3rd stringers. Arizona hasn’t had that luxury. 4th quarter offense and defense stats for Stanford are meaningless.

anyway, isn’t it nice and convenient that you’ve done your thurough objective analysis and come to the conclusion that your team is better while we’ve done our totally separate, yet equally objective analysis and determined Stanford is better positioned to win? amazing how those things work out….

i do envy you your confidence. i’m personally very nervous about the outcome of the game. we’ve got a good team with some solid play on both sides of the ball. i just hope we can stand up to the awesome team you watch every week.

elPalo

@DC4– LY’s game was Luck’s seventh college game. He has improved since that time. Stanford had chances to score in the last few minutes, but a few dropped balls killed the drives (I also think Luck threw balls that were not catchable, he doesn’t do that anymore).

Barkely is a helluva passer. I watched most of the Hawaii game and thought he had improved considerably over last year. Then I saw the Stanford game and parts of the Cal and Oregon games and realized he was the real deal. On paper, the stats favor Foles over Barkley, but I would have Barkley over him any day. Being an $C hater, I hope you realize I come to that conclusion out of respect for his ability as a player. So much that I’m giving him the nickname “Sir Matt” (take off on Charles Barkley, get it?). Vaunted as you feel about Arizona’s D, you will have lots of fun with Sir Matt.

Luck vs. Foles? Luck is definitely the more complete player, better threat, better leader. If he has a good day, you will appreciate why he’s so respected. Foles, however, is a great player in the Arizona spread system. He has mastered the dink-dunk passes, which is why he’s >72% on completions. Note that his passer efficiency is not way up there, that’s due to the fact most of his completions are less than 10 yards.

Tomorrow will come down to how well Stanford can defend against those short passes from Foles. If Stanford is like last year, expect a barn burner. If they have truly improved, and learned something from the Nebraska tape, then Stanford has the edge.

dc4azcats

Last years game was Foles 3rd as a starter. He was still 40 of 51.

He’s better this year because of coach Frank Scelfo who’s as good as it gets as it relates to coaching QB’s. He’s turned both Foles and Scott in to QB’s that complete 75% of their passes. It’s not a fluke and it’s not all dunk and dink. Last year his average completion was 6.08 yards – TY its 8.42. As a comparison – Luck is at 8.50 yards per completion.

Luck is a better leader? I’m not sure how you can say that since you have no idea how much Foles is looked upon as a leader on his team. Coupled with his ability to lead his team down the field for last minute wins vs Iowa and Cal says quite a bit about his leadership abilities.

I would also add that Foles didn’t get the pleasure of playing vs Wazzu, UW, and Ucla like Luck did. Scott did and he completed 75% of his passes and threw for something close to 300 yards a game.

As for his passing efficiency – is #21 in the country not “way up there”? As mentioned – he’s number 9 in passing and yet he didn’t get to play against 3 teams that certainly would’ve helped as it relates to his stats.

This game will come down to who can get the most stops and I think Arizona has the edge there. I also like Scott as a wildcard in this game and I think he breaks off a big run that helps Arizona get a W.
That and your secondary doesn’t come close to matching up with Arizona’s Wr’s.

Again – have enjoyed the banter and look forward to a great game.

robert

UofA fan here. Game should be great. Both teams are better than they have been in recent history.

My concern with U of A is Stoops. I predict a meltdown sometime during the game.

FarmSkeptic

dc4azcats – I’m glad you enjoy the repartee. With the new Pac12 schedule out, it appears we’ll be doing this again, but earlier in the year. I suspect you’ll have loads more reasons why the Wildcats will dominate the Cardinal in the eventuality that Luck and/or Harbaugh leave after this season. I may throw in the towel and cry ‘uncle’ much earlier…

dc4azcats

@ FarmSkeptic – curious as to what you think will happen with both Luck and Harbaugh? Do you think if one goes the other does as well – or is it 2 separate deals and one has nothing to do with the other?

I could see Harbaugh taking the Vikings job but what do I know!!

I like that we get you at our place next year as Arizona – like Stanford – is a pretty good team at home.

FarmSkeptic

@dc4azcats – some people are talking about labor issues in the NFL and that will stop Luck from declaring. i don’t know anything about that stuff, but assuming that’s not real or doesn’t impact his decision, i would put it at more than 50/50 for him to declare for the draft. he might love being a student athlete (his family values education), going to school with his younger sister, going after the rose bowl one more time. but i gotta think the overall team this year is better than it will be next so this will be his peak. but who knows. as for harbaugh, despite the man-love he expresses for luck, i gotta believe his decision will be independent of luck’s. it will be about money (how much he’s offered to leave or given a raise to stay) and how attractive the job is.

if you put a gun to my head, i’d say luck is going and harbaugh will stay another year or two until a primo job comes around, but it will all change as the annual coaching carousel begins in december.

rioryon

The Arizona OL is HUGE, even compared to Stanford, they out-weigh their Card OL counterparts by 30 lbs each. Talk about Fat Cats !

The Arizona DL is more impressive, returning 6 of their top 8 from last yr’s squad. On most teams the fastest D linemen play the end position giving them more outside leverage for end runs and the ability to “speed rush” the QB. In certain situations the Arizona D line plays 4 DE’s.

HC Mike Stoops was Defensive Coordinator(DC) at Kansas St 1996-1998 when K-St went 31-5 during that stretch, shutting out 3 and holding 16 opps to single digits. He joined his brother Bob as DC at Oklahoma from 1999-2003, turning around a stumbling program that was 5-6 in ’98 to 12-0 in 2yrs, and outstanding Defense was a hallmark of all those teams.
Stoops has struggled in his 6+ yrs in the role as HC at Arizona. After last week’s win over UCLA, Stoops finally got back to a .500 winning pct (40-40 now; he’s been under .500 at AU ever since losing 2 after a first game win, 21-3 vs powerhouse Northen Arizona).

Stanford didn’t play Ariz in 2004 (Stoops’ 1st yr) but beat them as 5.5pt underdogs in Tucson, 20-16, in ’05; losing 7-20 as +3.5 home dogs in ’06; upsetting them again 21-20 as +13.5 dogs in ’07 (Hardbaugh’s 1st yr); upsetting them again as +7 home dogs under Hardbaugh in ’08, 24-23; then losing as a +4pt visiting dog last yr, 38-43…

(Note to Harmspectacle : The Cards have been underdogs in the casinos the previous 5 games, but have won 3 of them outright – so much for your theory, at least in this series)…

Give the coaching edge to Harbaugh. Give the edge on Defense to Stoops. While Foles has been an impressive passer, and Criner is an NFL type talent at WR, i wonder why they only scored 10 at home against Cal. i wonder why they lost at home against Oregon St. They were less than impressive on the road against UCLA, and were never able to put them away til the closing minute. And they have yet to play the elite teams of the conference (Ore, USC, Stan). Nevertheless, beginning that stretch of tough games this week, they will be sky hight emotionally, but so will Stanford.
Given the recent history of tight, close games, plus the stakes and the intensity of this week’s match-up, i would not give away 9 or 9.5 pts and bet the Stanford side. On paper, the Wildcat side looks like the best bet this yr, especially if you can get 10pts (buy the extra .5 pt if you have to).
Sports Bettor’s Rule #1: NEVER bet with your heart.

elPalo

I agree with you, but had the rare opportunity to actually put money down as wife is in Vegas (one of those girl get-together things). I would have preferred a line of at most -7.5 and the sheet actually said -5.5, but it is now revised to -9.5. What the heck, I put a small sum down. If Stanford beats the spread, it will probably go to something such as her lunch, spa treatment, etc.

abcdefg

“War Eagle!! says:
November 4th, 2010 at 10:25 am
This really is mute as Auburn will roll through the rest of its schedule and its unlikely that Boise or the Utah, TCU winner will lose the remainder of any of their games”

You can tell when the SEC fans enter the room.

It’s “moot”, not “mute”.

Enjoy your fifth NC. The PAC-10 will once again eat their own, and leave you to clobber another patsy in the big game.

OT

The winner of Arizona @ Stanford will move back into the Top 10.

Alabama has gone down at LSU. That means ‘Bama CANNOT get into the SEC title game even if ‘Bama were to beat Auburn. Auburn can clince the SEC West before the Iron Bowl by staying undefeated.

TCU routed Utah. Utah will drop at least 12 spots to #17 or worse.

TCU is now a solid #3.

Boise State is stuck at #4 and could be headed to the Humanitarian Bowl unless Nebraska, Oklahoma, Wisconsin, and Ohio State all end up with 3 losses (unlikely).